cu budgetreformreportcard april2012
TRANSCRIPT
8/2/2019 CU BudgetReformReportCard April2012
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cu-budgetreformreportcard-april2012 1/11
Citizens Union of the City of New York
299 Broadway, Suite 700 New York, NY 10007‐1976
phone 212‐227‐0342 • fax 212‐227‐0345 • [email protected] • www.citizensunion.org
Peter J.W. Sherwin, Chair • Dick Dadey, Executive Director
CITIZENS UNION NEW YORK STATE BUDGET REFORM REPORT CARD: 2012 AN IMPROVEMENT BUT STILL AN INCOMPLETE
April 2012 With no messages of necessity used to pass the state’s final budget bills for the first time in years, and the budget enacted one day ahead of
the deadline, New York State’s budget process saw some welcomed improvement in the 2012 budget process compared to recent years.
Though progress was made, the entire state budget process still fell short; the state did not fully meet the modest improvements of the
budget
reforms
of
2007,
and
there
was
no
action
on
further
reforms,
leaving
in
place
a
process
that
is
still
too
opaque,
complicated
and
rushed.
This report card reviews the state budget process as conducted in 2012, 2011 and 2010, and their respective adherence to elements of the
2007 reforms. It also points out areas where additional reform is needed to improve the process. This report card builds upon previous
Citizens Union reports on state budget reform, including a report card on the 2008 and 2009 cyclesi, and a December 2008 Issue Brief and
Position Statement on New York State Budget Reform.ii
The 2007
reforms
included,
among
other
items,
“quick
‐start”
budget
discussions
and
a March
1st
deadline
for
revenue
consensus;
itemization
of certain lump‐sum appropriations and prohibition of legislative lump‐sum additions; a requirement for the legislature to pass rules
regarding the formation of joint conference committees and issuance of a schedule of dates for public hearings and meetings; provision of
fiscal impact statements on legislative changes before any vote; executive multiyear financial plans; and authorization of a new “Rainy Day”
fund at up to three percent of General Fund spending.
8/2/2019 CU BudgetReformReportCard April2012
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cu-budgetreformreportcard-april2012 2/11
8/2/2019 CU BudgetReformReportCard April2012
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cu-budgetreformreportcard-april2012 3/11
Citizens Union Page 3 NYS Budget Reform Report Card April 2012
KEY Thumbs up – progress was made
Thumbs down
–
reforms
were
ignored
or
process
continued
to
be
broken
(text
in
italics)
Mixed – some progress or adherence to law, but more work to do
Further action needed – Citizens Union recommendations
REFORM BUDGET REFORMS OF 2007 ACTION IN 2010 ACTION IN 2011 ACTION IN 2012 CITIZENS UNION
RECOMMENDATIONS
Use of Conference Committees
State law was
amended to require
that the legislature
adopt joint rules to
establish joint
budget conference
committees.
The Senate and
Assembly adopted
joint rules
establishing
conference
committees.
No conference
committees were
formed. There
was no public
discussion of
smaller pieces of
the budget. The
legislative
leaders’ meeting,
therefore, was
the only forum
where the budget
was discussed
publicly.
Conference committees were
used to reconcile some of the
different budget proposals of
each house, though meetings
were brief, limiting the role of
rank and file members.
Budget negotiations continued
behind closed doors, largely
driven by leadership.
Conference committees
were convened and used
to reconcile the different
budget proposals. There
continued to be a
sentiment, however, that
major decisions were
made behind closed
doors.iii
Enact changes to the
law to explicitly
require the creation
of joint conference
committees and
joint public
conference
committee
meetings, and
ensure rank‐and‐file
members have a
meaningful role in
the process.
Creation of an Independent Budget Office
Reforms did not
create an
Independent Budget
Office.
In spite of several
legislative
proposals, no
reforms were
enacted.
In spite of several legislative
proposals, no reforms were
enacted.
In spite of several
legislative proposals, no
reforms were
enacted.
An independent
budget office should
be established
to
conduct economic
analyses and provide
nonpartisan
projections of the
state’s revenues and
expenditures.
8/2/2019 CU BudgetReformReportCard April2012
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cu-budgetreformreportcard-april2012 4/11
8/2/2019 CU BudgetReformReportCard April2012
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cu-budgetreformreportcard-april2012 5/11
8/2/2019 CU BudgetReformReportCard April2012
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cu-budgetreformreportcard-april2012 6/11
Citizens Union Page 6
NYS Budget Reform Report Card April 2012
REFORM
BUDGET REFORMS
OF 2007
ACTION IN 2010 ACTION IN 2011 ACTION IN 2012
CITIZENS UNION
RECOMMENDATIONS
Use of Messages
of Necessityix
Budget reforms did
not address
messages of
necessity.
Messages of
necessity were
used in both
houses for all
twelve budget
extenders, though
only for certain
budget bills in the
regular budget
process: in
both
houses, the
deficiency budget,
and in the
Assembly the
Public Protection &
General
Government and
Transportation,
and Economic
Development
Environmental
Protection (TED)
bills.
In spite of
legislative
proposals, no
reforms were
enacted.
Messages of
necessity were
used in both
houses for nearly
all budget bills,
excluding the
debt service
appropriation
bill.
In spite of
legislative
proposals, no
reforms were
enacted.
No messages of necessity
were used
for
budget
bills,
which aged the full three days.
Major pieces of legislation
with large fiscal impacts,
however, were passed with
messages of necessity, such as
the enactment of Tier 6 and
other
pension
reforms
in
March 2012 and the revision
of the tax code in December
2011.
In spite of legislative
proposals, no reforms were
enacted.
The use of messages of
necessity should
be
limited to when it is
evident that a delay in
the Legislature’s action
would have significant
adverse consequences
and the governor
presents
documentation of
such
need.
8/2/2019 CU BudgetReformReportCard April2012
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cu-budgetreformreportcard-april2012 7/11
Citizens Union Page 7 NYS Budget Reform Report Card April 2012
REFORM BUDGET REFORMS OF 2007 ACTION IN 2010 ACTION IN 2011 ACTION IN 2012 CITIZENS UNION
RECOMMENDATIONS
Use of Performance
Budgeting to Tie Funding with
Results
Budget reforms did
not address
performance
budgeting.
Most state funds
lack any
real
measure of
performance and
accountability for
their usage, except
for education
funding through
Contracts for
Excellence.
In spite of several
legislative
proposals, no
reforms were
enacted.
Most state funds
lack any
real
measure of
performance and
accountability for
their usage,
except for
education
funding through
Contracts for
Excellence.
In spite of several
legislative
proposals, no
reforms were
enacted.
Most state funds continue to
lack any
real
measure
of
performance and
accountability for their usage,
except for limited education
funding.
New efforts regarding
performance for education
funding
focus
largely
on
cost‐
savings and efficiency rather
than performance. Examples
include performance
measurement for teachers in
exchange for federal funds,
and competitive grants for
education.x
In spite
of
several
legislative
proposals, no reforms were
enacted.
Performance budgeting
and outcome
measurement should be
used to help
policymakers determine
whether programs are
meeting stated goals
and promote a more
rational appropriation
of state
funds.
8/2/2019 CU BudgetReformReportCard April2012
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cu-budgetreformreportcard-april2012 8/11
Citizens Union Page 8
NYS Budget Reform Report Card April 2012
REFORM
BUDGET REFORMS
OF 2007
ACTION IN 2010 ACTION IN 2011 ACTION IN 2012
CITIZENS UNION
RECOMMENDATIONS
Law amended to
require itemization
of funds for
Temporary
Assistance for
Needy Families
(TANF), Medicaid,
and the
Environmental
Protection Fund.
Loophole remains
to allow lump‐sum
additions by the
legislature in
budget legislation
provided they are
itemized in joint
resolutions passed
after the normal
budget process.
Legislative
additions can
still
be made in lump
sum
appropriations
except in
categories denied
by the 2007 budget
reforms.
Legislative
additions can
still
be made in lump
sum
appropriations
except in
categories denied
by the 2007
budget reforms.
Several lump‐sum
appropriations were
exempted
from the 2007 reform law,
allowing the Senate and
Assembly to pass separate
resolutions reminiscent of
member items. Examples of
such lump sums include the
new “bullet aid” to schools
totaling nearly
$30
million,
and smaller pots of domestic
violence prevention and other
local law enforcement funds. xi
Lump‐sum
Appropriations
The reforms did not
establish criteria
for
distributing
lump‐sum
appropriations or
require reports on
their usage.
No criteria for
distribution of or
reporting
required
for lump‐sum
appropriations.
No criteria for
distribution of or
reporting
required for
lump‐sum
appropriations.
No criteria for distribution of
or reporting required for lump‐
sum
appropriations.
Lump‐sum
appropriations should
disclose the detailed
purposes and criteria
set forth for their
distribution.
A time limit for the
reappropriation of
lump‐sums should be
instituted to decrease
slush funds and the use
of such funds as “one‐
shot” budget gap fillers.
There should be regular
reporting on lump‐sum
appropriations that
includes detailed
information regarding
funds distributed and
their
recipients,
and
remaining funds.
8/2/2019 CU BudgetReformReportCard April2012
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cu-budgetreformreportcard-april2012 9/11
8/2/2019 CU BudgetReformReportCard April2012
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cu-budgetreformreportcard-april2012 10/11